The present invention relates to computer models and simulations, more particularly to computer architectures for creating and facilitating interoperability among various systems and components that are to be included in the modeling or simulation of activities such as involving mission performance.
The “High Level Architecture” is a computer simulation architecture that is designed to establish and facilitate interoperability among different classes of computer simulations. The HLA has been developed by the United States Department of Defense (DoD) since the early 1990s.
According to the HLA, the simulations interact as managed by a run-time infrastructure (RTI), which uses an object model template (OMT) as the common framework for communication between the simulation entities. Each simulation entity is known as a federate. The combination of plural federates that are connected via the RTI is referred to as the federation. The OMT consists of two models for describing interactions and characteristics. The federation object model (FOM) describes interactions and characteristics for the federation; the simulation object model (SOM) describes interactions and characteristics for a particular federate.
The following two papers, each of which is hereby incorporated herein by reference, are informative regarding the DoD's HLA: Judith S. Dahmann, Richard M. Fujimoto and Richard M. Weatherly, “The Department of Defense High Level Architecture,” Proceedings of the 1997 Winter Simulation Conference, Atlanta, Ga., 7-10 Dec. 1997; Judith S. Dahmann, Richard M. Fujimoto and Richard M. Weatherly, “The DoD High Level Architecture: An Update,” Proceedings of the Second International Workshop on Distributed Interactive Simulation and Real-Time Applications, Montreal, Canada, 19-20 Jul. 1998.
“Interoperability” is the watchword, in general, for HLA. In 1996 the United States Department of Defense (DoD) designated the High Level Architecture (HLA) as the technical architecture for all DoD simulations. The HLA was intended to serve as an interoperative architecture for distributed computer simulation systems across all classes of simulations in the DoD. In its provisions on policies regarding DoD modeling and simulation (M&S) management, DoD Directive 5000.59, 8 Aug. 2007 states the goal of “maximizing commonality, reuse, interoperability, efficiencies and effectiveness of M&S.”
Nevertheless, universal interoperability among all simulations, regardless of disparities, is easier said than done. Dahmann et al., in the aforementioned paper entitled “The DoD High Level Architecture: An Update,” opine that universal interoperability of simulations cannot be accomplished under current technology: “Universal interoperability (the ability of any simulation to interoperate with any other simulation, regardless of original purpose or technical implementation) is not feasible with today's technology.”
The DoD's Modeling and Simulation Coordination Office (M&SCO), formerly called the Defense Modeling and Simulation Office (DMSO), acknowledges on its Internet home page that the original M&S vision is not as far along as it should be—that is, the vision of “a viable, flexible common technical framework for M&S to facilitate interoperability and reuse so DoD users could quickly find and pull together models and simulations to create credible combinations of live, virtual, and constructive joint capability forces for acquisition decision-making, programmatic analysis, experimentation, operational planning, testing, training, mission rehearsal, doctrine development, etc.”
Various workarounds have been suggested for HLA, For instance, subject matter-specific standards on top of HLA, extensions to HLA, and “best practices” to facilitate federation reuse. However, HLA workarounds, to the extent that they have been implemented, have met with limited success.
In the past, many DoD models and simulations were implemented for supporting specific military decisions relating to capacity, capability, and concepts of operation (CONOPS). These models usually demanded development of requirements and specifications, data input, analyst interface, and performance data for every entity that was to be modeled. Typically, at least two years were needed to develop a mission-level model and validate its performance before analysis could begin.
Although the terms “model” and “simulation” have occasionally been distinguished from each other in technical usage, these terms are used interchangeably herein to broadly refer to representation of a thing or system of things, such as representation of characteristics and behaviors of military missions.